The
issue relating to Palestine is one of the many problems affecting
the Middle East. It is also one of the oldest issues and probably
the hardest to solve. Conflicts, terrorism, endless negotiations,
ignored deals and popular uprisings have entrenched the opposing
parties. A long trail of blood that, as time goes by, becomes more
difficult to unravel.

The current scenario is as follows:

- Israel is unwilling to concede anything, it continues to expand
its settlements expropriating Palestinian lands regardless of the
UN’s injunctions and with the US support to any violation
guaranteed by its veto power at the Security Council. Israel’s
military is strong, its government is run by the far right and its
intention is to maintain its dominant role in the Middle East. Its
only worry derives from Iranian expansionism in Syria and beyond.
The Israelis are concerned by the Palestinians only because of the
security threat that comes from the Gaza Strip.

- On the other hand, the Palestinian community is split between
the National Palestinian Authority in Ramallah led by a weak
President as is Abu Mazen, who’s negotiating power is next to
zero, and the radical elements represented by Hamas in Gaza that
continue to fuel the tensions with Israel through ongoing protests
that cause numerous victims.

A lack of support

The Palestinian situation has worsened because even the Arab
countries that once supported its cause (or rather exploited it)
are now closer to Israel than to Palestine. Rather than promoting
the rights of the Palestinians, Arabs are worried by the expanding
Iranian sphere of influence in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. They have
no interest in supporting the Palestinian demands and entering
into a collision course with Israel. In fact, they know the
Israelis have the only army that could confront and possibly
defeat Teheran. A marriage of convenience where disagreements from
the past are not welcome.

Abandoned by everyone, the Palestinians only have two options
left: to keep on fighting as is proposed by Hamas or to accept any
solution that is imposed on them by a negotiation that does not
care about what they have to say. It’s a choice between
desperation and resignation.

Donald Trump

The
American carelessness

This dead end for the Palestinians has been favored by the
ruthless and undiplomatic stance of US President Donald Trump.
After having designated his son-in-law Jared Kushner as his
adviser on the Palestinian issue along chief negotiator Jason
Greenblatt, Trump has decided to move the US embassy to Jerusalem.
A break with the past associated with the concurrent decision to
cut all funding to the Palestinians and to the UN agency tasked
with delivering humanitarian aid to them, UNRWA.

The United States have chosen to stop being an impartial
negotiator and to side with Israel. By doing so they have ceased
to be super partes, fueled tensions in the talks and put the
Palestinians with their back to the wall. Rather than a
negotiator, Trump acted as a blackmailer.

The so-called US plan

For the past two years Donald Trump has claimed he is preparing a
peace plan that should see the light by the end of 2018. A plan
emphatically dubbed as “the plan of the century” that, according
to Israeli news, should deliver its share of do’s and don’ts. A
plan that has been negotiated with the Israeli government after
contacts with Ramallah and that seems to address the coexistence
between Israelis and Palestinians rather than solving territorial
issues. Jerusalem capital of the Palestinian state has been taken
off the table after the US decision to hand it over to Israel; the
return of the refugees, the destruction of the illegal settlements
in the West Bank, the respect of the boundaries of the Palestinian
State as it was in 1967, the connection between Gaza and the West
bank have all been sidelined.

Trump’s pragmatic approach doesn’t care about the principles and
values associated with the Palestinian cause. He only talks money.
Funds that should be provided to solve the problem and that should
come from the Gulf countries. He’s allegedly offering a new
capital for Palestine, in Qalqilya, in exchange for giving up any
claims on Jerusalem. What Donald Trump forgets is the religious
symbolism associated with Jerusalem.

Whatever the content, once the deal will be publicized the only
option left to the Palestinians will be to accept or reject the
proposal. The truth is the US President doesn’t care if the
blackmailing of the Palestinians works or not. What he is after is
the consensus of the Arab countries to his plan. What the
Palestinians decide to do is irrelevant. If the Arab countries
agree to the US initiative a major hurdle in their relationship
with Israel will be removed. This also means that the fate of
Palestine will not affect their liason with Tel Aviv anymore.

In other words, the Israeli-Palestinian peace plan is a false flag
to achieve another objective. And what the Palestinians choose
will not influence the outcome.

Israel is the United States’ strategic partner in the Middle East
and even more so now that Russia has stepped in in Syria and has
increased its grip on the region. The decision to move the US
embassy to Jerusalem clearly goes in this direction, along with
the support to the Israeli military.

Hamas
demonstration in Bethlehem

Hamas
and Gaza

The US exploits the situation in Gaza. Hamas is the ruler of the
Strip after its landslide victory in the 2006 elections. And Hamas
opposes the ANP and by doing so it weakens the negotiating
position of Mahmoud Abbas. And this plays into the hands of those
who want to diminish the role of the ANP.

Israel plays the same game. They would rather strike a deal with
Hamas because of the turmoil along its southern borders than with
the authorities in Ramallah. Furthermore, the Israelis know Iran
supports Hamas. While Abu Mazen is trying to assert international
law and universal self-determination principles, Hamas is more
down to earth: sanctions that block essential goods, unemployment,
economic crisis, a naval blockade, the lack of electricity and
water, lack of hygiene and hospitals in meltdown. Two million
people living in desperate conditions.

The ANP’s decision to block the funds for public servicemen in
Gaza could backfire and push Hamas to negotiate with the Israelis
rather than with Ramallah. The fact that Hamas is on the terror
list of several countries is of little or no importance anymore.

Synergies for the American plan

The US are aware that it is not enough to have Israel at its side
to solve the Palestinian issue. This is why they have decided to
co-opt neighboring countries to its cause. Egypt is relevant on
Gaza, since it contributes to the economic choking of the Strip.
Cairo has its own reasons: Egyptian authorities fear that
Palestinian radicals might merge with the ISIS groups that roam in
the Sinai.

But there are also historical reasons: from 1948 and until the
1967 debacle, when Israel occupied the Strip, Egypt ruled over
Gaza. The Palestinians took over in 1994 following the Oslo talks,
but there are a number of Egyptian nationalists that still claim
those territories.

The West Bank instead was part of Transjordan, the country ruled
by the Hashemite kingdom after the collapse of the Ottoman empire.
This was also occupied by the Israelis in 1967. Jordan has kept
close ties with the West Bank and has provided economic support to
the area. On another note: roughly half of all Jordanians –
although no statistics exist on the topic for this very reason –
are of Palestinian descent.

What the American plan seems to include is the provision to
confederate the West Bank with Jordan and the Gaza Strip to Egypt.
And adieu to Palestine.

The main question international observers are asking is whether
this plan has any chance of success. It is hard to believe that
the imposition of peace, whereby one of the two contenders takes
the decisions, while the other is called in or forced to accept a
deal, can bring a lasting solution. This is the case for the
unilateralism of the US approach, as is for the Israeli de facto
policy that has alienated any room for negotiations.

To think that the panacea for 60 years of conflict will come on
the day that the United States propose to the Palestinian National
Authority a make or break deal threatening to increase sanctions
in case of a refusal is a mere fantasy. As the Arab Israeli
citizens have realized when they turned overnight into second
class people for them not being Jewish, so will the Palestinians
share a similar fate if they are put under the rule of foreign
countries.